The advent of computers and electronic communications networks has enabled individuals and organizations (e.g., corporations) to disseminate information in a more efficient and rapid manner than was previously possible using conventional (ground) mail alone. For example, in a typical Internet-based electronic mail (email) system, a computer user sends and receives emails using a Web browser that accesses an Internet-based email application program, such as HOTMAIL by Microsoft Corp. A computer user may alternatively employ a desktop-based email application program, such as OUTLOOK by Microsoft Corp., to send and receive emails. In both of these scenarios, emails are delivered through one or more email networks (using one or more email protocols, such as the Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP), the Post Office Protocol 3 (POP3), and the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP)) to a recipient using the recipient's unique email address, which generally includes a combination of the recipient's domain name and user name.
Due to technological improvements in the past decade, which have made sending emails easier and more affordable, email campaigns have become an important part of many business models and, for example, communication efforts by non-commercial organizations. At the same time, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of unwanted emails received by users throughout the world (in particular, with regard to unsolicited commercial emails, or “SPAM”). An estimated 50% of all email traffic is SPAM, causing excessive congestion in the email network, and causing Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and organizations to spend resources processing and managing unwanted traffic. As a result, various laws, guidelines, and technological safeguards (e.g., black lists, content based SPAM filters, etc.) have been implemented in the past few years in an attempt to reduce the number of unsolicited emails received by computer users. While these safeguards, such as SPAM filters, may reduce the number of unwanted email messages in a recipient's inbox, the email network and/or ISPs and organizations must still process and manage the traffic. Moreover, while blocking or diverting at least some of such unsolicited emails from reaching the intended computer users, these actions have had a great adverse effect on senders of legitimate permission communications (e.g., organizations that send electronic communications, such as emails, only to recipients who have either requested or otherwise given the organization their “permission” to receive such emails). Below is a brief explanation of various examples of the problems currently faced by senders of legitimate permission communications (also referred to herein as “legitimate senders”).
One significant problem that legitimate senders now face relates to SPAM and inbox clutter affecting many (if not most) current email recipients. In particular, due to the large number of unsolicited emails that may occupy a recipient's inbox at any given time, it is not uncommon for such recipients to overlook and delete legitimate emails, and/or harbor adverse consumer sentiment with regard to all commercial senders (whether legitimate or not).
Another common problem faced by legitimate senders stems from the practice of blocking and blacklisting. ISPs often block incoming mail from certain Internet addresses (e.g., IP addresses) that they have determined to be a likely source of SPAM. For example, when a large number of emails originating from a particular IP address is detected by an ISP, the ISP may unilaterally decide that the emails are all unsolicited (and perhaps the result of a malicious Internet virus). Similarly, ISPs often subscribe to blacklists created by one or more of the currently existing hundreds of independent anti-SPAM organizations. The blacklists compiled by these anti-SPAM organizations contain those IP addresses that are suspected SPAM sources based on, for example, proprietary algorithms, research, SPAM reports, and other “secret ingredients.” When an ISP receives an email from a listed IP address, it will generally automatically block the email from reaching the intended recipient or deliver the email into a “junk folder” of the recipient.
While blocking and blacklists do prevent a lot of SPAM and other unsolicited emails from reaching their intended recipients, because blocking and blacklists are at least partially based on speculation, delivery of permission emails by legitimate senders are also very frequently prevented from reaching their intended recipients. By some estimates, as much as one-third of all sent emails (many of which are legitimate emails) fail to reach the recipients' inboxes, often with many of the recipients not being aware that their email is being diverted, blocked, destroyed, or otherwise tampered with.
Legitimate senders of traditional emails also find themselves subject to creative limitations for more multiple reasons. For example, because many SPAM filters are triggered by certain common and effective marketing phrases, senders of permission emails often feel compelled to forgo such phrases. Additionally, legitimate senders may choose to avoid many capital letters or images, blue color font, and various other creative elements that have been known to also trigger SPAM filters. Even when emails are not deleted or diverted by a SPAM filter or other mechanism based on content, many organizations (e.g., ISPs and corporations) choose to strip out all images and links from incoming email in an attempt to thwart computer users from being exposed to offensive images and dangerous links. In fact, some organizations go as far as to reduce all HTML messages to plain text. In either of these two cases, recipients receive at least somewhat censored versions of many incoming emails, including those originating from legitimate senders that pose no risk to the recipients.
Moreover, even when legitimate emails reach their destinations, and are not modified by a third party prior to their receipt, it is not always the case that the recipients are able to view the emails as intended by the senders. This is due in part to the existence of a vast array of email readers to choose from in the current market. Each of these readers has its own characteristics and displays email messages differently, making it nearly impossible for senders of email to craft a consistent presentation for its entire recipient base. Moreover, although rich media (e.g., online video and animation) is among the fastest growing and most effective marketing tools available in the online world today, and despite the proliferation of broadband and relatively cheap bandwidth and the availability of rich media friendly computer systems, many (if not all) of email readers in widespread use today fail to adequately leverage the effectiveness of rich media that is received with emails. In many cases, due to the limitations of certain email readers, rich media can not be viewed at all by a recipient of an email.
Moreover, while necessary for organizations and other senders to measure the performance of their campaigns, the process of tracking and reporting of emails has been and continues to be extremely problematic. In particular, accurate tracking and reporting of deliveries, bounces, opens, and clicks associated with emails has been difficult or impossible to achieve. For example, because it is not possible to determine if an email message actually reaches the intended inbox, deliveries must be calculated in these systems by subtracting bounced messages from the total number of messages sent. However, the tracking of bounced messages (i.e., messages that are not accepted for delivery by the target server) is itself problematic. For example, while the recipient's mail server generally returns a bounce report to the sending server explaining the reasons for an email being not deliverable (e.g., incorrect email address, full inbox, server problems, etc.), the accuracy of such a bounce report is often less than desired. Additionally, the little pixels used to track opens in HTML messages are often stripped or otherwise blocked, and text message opens can not be tracked. Tracking clicks by a recipient has been similarly problematic.
Individuals and organizations, particularly those sending large numbers of emails, are also hurt by various delays from start to finish. Mail servers have varying degrees of throughput and maximum output, and organizations using shared mail server farms often wait in queue or fight for processing power when a campaign is launched. Once emails are sent, each one must travel across the frequently congested Internet and make its way to the recipient's ISP, which in turn must process and then deliver the email. These and other factors often cause emails in a large campaign to take hours to fully deliver. Delivery times are also adversely affected when bounce reports are returned with insufficient explanation, at times requiring a sender to resend bounced emails several times.
A legitimate sender's requirement to defend against false reports of SPAM is also a significant obstacle that must be faced when dealing with convention email. More often than not, despite the existence of permission agreements, a sender (including a legitimate sender) is immediately and sometimes without notice blocked and blacklisted in response to one or more complaints by recipients. As a result, legitimate senders must often expend significant resources, including time and money, defending themselves from false SPAM reports and keeping their IP addresses off of blacklists. Larger amounts of resources will also likely be required to comply with new and constantly changing anti-spam regulations and the growing bureaucracy associated therewith.
These and other issues have all contributed to lost opportunities by senders of legitimate permission communications, who are estimated to have spent up to $2 billion dollars last year on email communication campaigns. Accordingly, it is desirable to provide new and improved methods and systems for producing, managing, delivering, retrieving, and/or tracking electronic communications (e.g., permission based electronic communications) that alleviate at least some of the above (and potentially other) problems commonly associated with existing electronic communications.